Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
125 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
53 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Unbalanced Random Matching Markets with Partial Preferences (2402.09667v1)

Published 15 Feb 2024 in cs.GT, cs.DM, and cs.DS

Abstract: Properties of stable matchings in the popular random-matching-market model have been studied for over 50 years. In a random matching market, each agent has complete preferences drawn uniformly and independently at random. Wilson (1972), Knuth (1976) and Pittel (1989) proved that in balanced random matching markets, the proposers are matched to their $\ln n$th choice on average. In this paper, we consider markets where agents have partial (truncated) preferences, that is, the proposers only rank their top $d$ partners. Despite the long history of the problem, the following fundamental question remained unanswered: \emph{what is the smallest value of $d$ that results in a perfect stable matching with high probability?} In this paper, we answer this question exactly -- we prove that a degree of $\ln2 n$ is necessary and sufficient. That is, we show that if $d < (1-\epsilon) \ln2 n$ then no stable matching is perfect and if $d > (1+ \epsilon) \ln2 n$, then every stable matching is perfect with high probability. This settles a recent conjecture by Kanoria, Min and Qian (2021). We generalize this threshold for unbalanced markets: we consider a matching market with $n$ agents on the shorter side and $n(\alpha+1)$ agents on the longer side. We show that for markets with $\alpha =o(1)$, the sharp threshold characterizing the existence of perfect stable matching occurs when $d$ is $\ln n \cdot \ln \left(\frac{1 + \alpha}{\alpha + (1/n(\alpha+1))} \right)$. Finally, we extend the line of work studying the effect of imbalance on the expected rank of the proposers (termed the ``stark effect of competition''). We establish the regime in unbalanced markets that forces this stark effect to take shape in markets with partial preferences.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (27)
  1. The new york city high school match. American Economic Review 95, 2 (2005), 364–367.
  2. The Boston public school match. American Economic Review 95, 2 (2005), 368–371.
  3. Ishan Agarwal and Richard Cole. 2023. Stable Matching: Choosing Which Proposals to Make. arXiv:2204.04162 [cs.GT]
  4. Tiered Random Matching Markets: Rank Is Proportional to Popularity. In 12th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS 2021) (Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Vol. 185), James R. Lee (Ed.). Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany, 46:1–46:16. https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ITCS.2021.46
  5. Unbalanced random matching markets: The stark effect of competition. Journal of Political Economy 125, 1 (2017), 69–98.
  6. Linda Cai and Clayton Thomas. 2022. The short-side advantage in random matching markets. In Symposium on Simplicity in Algorithms (SOSA). SIAM, 257–267.
  7. School choice in Chile. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation. 325–343.
  8. Devdatt P. Dubhashi and Alessandro Panconesi. 2009. Concentration of Measure for the Analysis of Randomized Algorithms. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:8135469
  9. David Gale and Lloyd S Shapley. 1962. College admissions and the stability of marriage. The American mathematical monthly 69, 1 (1962), 9–15.
  10. Two-sided matching markets with strongly correlated preferences. In Fundamentals of Computation Theory: 23rd International Symposium, FCT 2021, Athens, Greece, September 12–15, 2021, Proceedings 23. Springer, 3–17.
  11. Dan Gusfield. 1987. Three fast algorithms for four problems in stable marriage. SIAM J. Comput. 16, 1 (1987), 111–128.
  12. Dan Gusfield and Robert W Irving. 1989. The stable marriage problem: structure and algorithms. MIT press.
  13. N Immoralica. 2005. Marriage, honesty, and stability. In Proceedings of the 16th annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete algorithms, 2005. 53–62.
  14. Nicole Immorlica and Mohammad Mahdian. 2015. Incentives in large random two-sided markets. ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation (TEAC) 3, 3 (2015), 1–25.
  15. In which matching markets does the short side enjoy an advantage?. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Second Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms. 1374–1386.
  16. Donald Ervin Knuth. 1976. Mariages stables et leurs relations avec d’autres problèmes combinatoires: introduction à l’analyse mathématique des algorithmes. Les Presses de l’Universite de Montreal (1976).
  17. Stable husbands. Random Structures & Algorithms 1, 1 (1990), 1–14.
  18. David Manlove. 2013. Algorithmics of matching under preferences. Vol. 2. World Scientific.
  19. Simon Mauras. 2021. Analysis of random models for stable matchings. Ph. D. Dissertation. Université Paris Cité.
  20. David G McVitie and Leslie B Wilson. 1970. Stable marriage assignment for unequal sets. BIT Numerical Mathematics 10, 3 (1970), 295–309.
  21. David G McVitie and Leslie B Wilson. 1971. The stable marriage problem. Commun. ACM 14, 7 (1971), 486–490.
  22. Boris Pittel. 1989. The average number of stable matchings. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 2, 4 (1989), 530–549.
  23. Boris Pittel. 2019. On likely solutions of the stable matching problem with unequal numbers of men and women. Mathematics of Operations Research 44, 1 (2019), 122–146.
  24. Alvin E Roth. 2002. The economist as engineer: Game theory, experimentation, and computation as tools for design economics. Econometrica 70, 4 (2002), 1341–1378.
  25. Alvin E Roth and Elliott Peranson. 1999. The redesign of the matching market for American physicians: Some engineering aspects of economic design. American economic review 89, 4 (1999), 748–780.
  26. LB Wilson. 1972a. An analysis of the stable marriage assignment algorithm. BIT Numerical Mathematics 12, 4 (1972), 569–575.
  27. Leslie B. Wilson. 1972b. An analysis of the stable marriage assignment algorithm. BIT Numerical Mathematics 12 (1972), 569–575.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.